Investors get few answers at Stanford hearing

Investors hoping for some relief from the Stanford Financial receivership that has left their investments frozen got few answers today. The Chronicle’s Tom Fowler was at the hearing in Dallas, which mostly dealt with extending the restraining orders.

The judge order receiver Ralph Janvey to respond by March 16 to investor motions that their accounts be released. Investors then have until March 23 to file their response to Janvey’s reply. That means a hearing probably won’t happen before the end of the month.

“There is no immediate relief in sight,” attorney Ben Elmore, who represents Houston investor Ray Ballantyne, told me. ”There’s nothing we can do except wait and abide by the deadlines set by the court.”

Janvey said he hopes by March 16 to propose a protocol for releasing accounts valued under $100,000 and held by Stanford’s clearing firms.

Lynn Brown said if the protocol leads to the unfreezing of those accounts, it would definitely help her 80-year-old mother, who needs access to her Stanford account to pay her bills.

According to Janvey’s estimates, more than 35,000 Stanford investors have accounts being held by the clearing firm Pershing LLC, Elmore said.

3 Responses

Below is a letter sent to the Receiver appointed, Mr. Janvey. It’s my experience as well as my father’s (who is the one effected by this), that Mr. Jnvey does not seem to have any answers and cannot seem to provide any daily information to the investors. Not even eails are acknowledged or responded to. My father only had his account with Stanford for only 3 1/2 weeks. The courts need to do more. Is my father to go bankrupt (and loose everything)while Janvey picks and chooses whose accounts are unfrozen.

Mr. Janvey,

It has been brought to my attention that a decision was made to unfreeze the assets of some of the affected clients/investors and not others. After reading your statement filed with the courts yesterday there seem to be some questions lingering.

• What can the receivership do about the fact that my father’s car is about to be repossessed after only missing two payments? The first payment was sent but bounced due to the personal banking account being frozen. He’s currently late with the second payment due to the same issue.

• He’s currently living off of his credit cards that will require payments to be made. Once that happens, he will have no way to pay them much less feed himself and his wife (who is also retired and retirement benefits frozen with his). He received a living stipend every month to live from and pay bills. He has been cut off from that completely.

• What documentation can be provided to their creditors advising that the courts have frozen all of their assets (including personal bank accounts)? Why should they have to loose their car, home, medical insurance, etc, while you all comb through files. The first obligation should be to the clients not the court system.

• Who made the decision that accounts valued at $100,000 were at less risk and should be potentially unfrozen first? If the accounts that these retirees live off of is all they have, how dare you all make that distinction. You’re playing roulette with the lives of these people. Does your statement mean that only clients with accounts with $100,000 or less will get to see their money soon? That smacks in the face of my father who had only moved his account to Stanford 3 ½ weeks prior to the freezing of his accounts.

• Why has your group of experts taken the stance of not responding to emails being sent to you? Maybe your groups of experts need to understand that there is still consumer/customer service attached to this who mess. All of the clients need to be updated daily on what is happening.

I’ve taken the liberty of contacting some of the major media outlets regarding the whole process by which this is being handled. I really feel like the courts and the SEC did not take all injured parties into account when assets where frozen. Once again making someone like my dad who worked for Exxon 40 years and saved his money the whole time, the one left to absorb the consequences to all the experts’ actions. These clients need to hear from you daily. It’s my understanding that that is part of your job description when you were appointed receiver.

The courts will never be quick enough to save the finances of people who have been screwed out of their life’s work. By the time anything can be rectified, it will be too late…and only the lawyers will get paid for this fiasco. It always works that way. Terribly sorry to hear of your dad’s demise, Lisa Clay, but the court process will never be quick or enough, especially when the money is already gone. I’ve been though it before with people in my family. The only way is to reassess, take a vacation, realize that you are still alive and have family, and start over. I did. People in my own family have been though this in different situations as well…but never like this one. It’s like paying for fire insurance and the company isn’t real. Nobody is held accountable anymore, except for people like your dad who worked his tail off for his family and someone steals it out of thin air.